Archive for March, 2017

The news is dominated by two releases from the DCMS / Libraries Taskforce. Both are useful, welcome and flawed.

The first set of releases are all about the process of moving library services away from direct council control and towards being non-profits. The libraries minister is clearly invested in this, as his video to a “masterclass” on the subject showed, and you can expect to see this as part of a concerted push to there being more library trusts in the future. There are case studies from library trusts who have gone through the process with fairly detailed guides on how to check if such a move would be good for the particular part of the country you are in. While honest and open, sadly, these reports would not be approved by a scientific journal as the writers of them are the trusts themselves, who would be foolish to criticise their own actions, not least because the four in question have now formed a service to sell their expertise on the subject to hopefuls. As such, one can only consider them as the “pro” part of any diligent survey on whether you should change to a trust. No-one, of course, is being encouraged or paid, to do the “con” part. Which is a shame because I actually quite like library trusts but I think all options need to be deeply looked at, and biases or gaps in the data (however unconscious) will not help clear decision-making.

Speaking of biases and gaps, the second set of releases is all about the much-heralded and delayed new “dataset” for English public libraries. The new file presents a list of all the library buildings reported by councils in July last year. It simply contains the name of the branch, address and contact email. This is the very minimum that one could expect and represents no improvement (other than an updating) over the last dataset released in 2012. Well, except that one covered all of the UK. There are strong hopes that this one, at least, will be updated and there are fairly ambitious plans to expand it into something more than a direct mailing list. However, it took ages (remember this data is nine months old) to get even this sorted and I imagine there are all sorts of strong local and national pressures to limit the release of anything, well, embarrassing … almost as if the decline of the library service due to budget cuts is somehow a secret. For any sector this is embarrassing, but for one which pretends to deal with information, this is bordering on the humiliating, as the image capture of the “no data” screen below shows. It’s not a pipe dream – the Netherlands has managed it but, as the Dutch discovered, it needs to be done over the protests of senior managers, be they public librarians (at least officially) dedicated to free information or their seniors, who may not like others really seeing how they’re doing.

Finally, thank you for all your kind comments about my previous post on the end of the tri-borough experiment and what it means to merging of library services. LibrariesWest have quite rightly been in touch to point out they’re doing a very nice combined service in the South West, thank you, although not to the depth of the erstwhile London scheme. For a list of all such partnerships I know about – see this nicely open and freely available list . Do you see how useful that is, library chiefs? Just think if all data was available that way. Think of the wonders that could be achieved. Stop thinking of worst case scenarios. Because you’re in one. Start thinking of ways out.

I’ve seen many people argue for the combining of library services across council boundaries in order to save money. And, indeed, 151 library services just for England does seem a tad excessive. The Tri-borough (*deep breath*: Hammersmith & Fulham, Kensington & Chelsea and Westminster) has been held up as a great example of how this can work, with the three councils combining many different services, including libraries. Here’s an article from 2012 describing how well it was working. However, sadly, the BBC reports today that the partnership is ending in a divorce where the warring councils are each accusing the other of insincerity. So, why? Well, Hammersmith claims it was losing from the deal. Which may be true, but I suspect the real reason is that in 2014, Hammersmith became Labour controlled and the other two remained Conservative and it’s taken this long for it all to unravel. Imagine how much fun the councillor meetings between them must have been until they’ve finally now decided to go their separate ways.

Reality has a rich sense of irony sometimes as, on the same day, Bournemouth has confirmed it will combine its library services with Poole. Both councils are Conservative controlled so they may have a chance, for now. But I suggest buying the popcorn and settling down in a comfortable chair to watch if one of the two councils changes party control. However, I understand all of Dorset is looking to go unitary so that could solve that one.

So does that cast a shadow on combining library services? Well, there may be a way for councils of all stripes to happily share control. That magic partnering option is outsourcing. The non-profit leisure trust GLL currently run Greenwich (Labour), Wandsworth (Conservative) and Lincolnshire (No overall control, Conservative leader) libraries, are doing things with combined gyms and libraries in Lambeth (Labour), will soon be taking over Dudley (No overall control, Labour leader) and are trying for Bromley (Conservative). That’s what I know of but I’m sure there’s more. I suspect GLL gain all sorts of economies of scale from this, and so in this age that weirdly combines localism and austerity, they may be the closest we have to combining library services. Albeit at one remove and almost by stealth.

I was interested to see the news from Birmingham today that the trust intended to seek philanthropic donations is being closed down. Turns out it’s costing more money that it was taking in, mainly because people are wary of simply paying for something cut by the council. It caught my eye especially as there was a recent CILIP piece on philanthropy that was largely in favour of it. I’m wary of it myself. While, philanthropy is nothing new in the UK, as the many Carnegie libraries show, but it’s a lot less common here than it is in the US. Also, as Birmingham shows, it seems to be a case of success breeding success … so philanthropy may only accentuate the increasingly obvious divide between library services who are doing well and those who are cutting like no-one’s business. Moreover, the Government naturally loves it as philanthropy reduces their need to support the library service. I suspect they call it “imaginative” and “innovative” quite often. While I welcome any money for libraries, I suspect (like volunteers) it’s no way to run an important national service and the key must be proper funding in the first place.

The library innovation funding has been awarded and announced. It gives an idea of what libraries themselves consider innnovative and also what ACE is interested in funding. While there is a pleasing variety of grants given, none are entirely new ideas to me (with ideas mainly being copied from the USA), although some are probable firsts in the UK. The clear winning idea, probably to no-one’s surprise, is the currently fashionable makerspaces. One thing for sure is that we will know with a certainty after two years or so whether makerspaces in libraries will be a success or not. I have a concern that, like code clubs, they will be popular and look good but do not tie in entirely comfortably with the core role of public libraries. It may be that by moving libraries into a more active teaching role with things like FabLabs rather than traditionally more passive/assisting provision library services will be energised and revolutionised. Or it may be that they become time sinks and a distraction from the more important work public libraries provide. At least now, well. we’ll find out, as it is the purpose of this innovation funding in the first place.

Of the other ideas, the one that strikes me as the most innovative is providing free meals to children over the summer holidays in Plymouth: this has been successfully practiced in the US for years and it will be interesting to see how it goes here. There’s also the promise of this as being part of having public libraries as the third space for children away from school and the home: a natural area for the sector that could do with developing. Sadly, though, I am seeing nothing on something I was really hoping for. This was promoting library services, which has long been one of the key weaknesses of the sector. £200k less for the seven different varieties of maker space and £200k for a publicity campaign could have made a massive difference, but it may be no bid was made for that.

Finally, it’s worth noting the tough line that GLL are taking in Lincolnshire with those with fines over £20. They’re not alone in doing so and it shows that many library services are increasingly having to get very tough on charges/costs in order to keep library services running. It’s a shame though that we’re reduced to this in the UK while the tide in the USA appears to be turning towards not charging fines at all.

I was asked a few questions recently about the role of public libraries: I thought I’d share with you some of my response:

The purpose of the public library has not changed since their inception. It is to provide equality of access to information. In the past, this has been almost entirely in physical forms and so building based. We are currently in the process of providing equality of access in digital forms for use anywhere.

Libraries can aid social mobility by continuing to provide equality of access to information, which is now more a key to social mobility than ever before. The ideal is for the public library to provide anyone, regardless of location, background and ability to pay, with an equal playing field with those who can afford to pay. This not only includes books and e-books but also access to e-resources and to a quiet place to study (not always available in homes) and computer/wifi access. There is also a role for libraries to give basic training to those who need it on how to access these resources.

Libraries should embrace change by remembering what their core purpose is and by publicising that to others. There is a danger that libraries can be distracted by fashion (and you’ll know it when you see it) and spend time on those better suited to concentrating on providing and being ambassadors for the core service.

Because, we can get caught up in all long and convoluted ways of expressing what libraries are for and, in doing so, get confused about what we should be doing. But, in the end, it’s simple. It’s “Providing Equality Of Access To Information”. What’s complicated,is how best to do it. But, when it’s done right, it’s a wondrous thing to behold.

I was sorry, but unsurprised, to see President Trump – a philistine politician if ever there was one – taking an axe to the US federal budget for libraries last week. US public libraries have, at least to my UK shell-shocked eyes, been experiencing something of a golden age, with usage up and exciting new initiatives being started, often copied a couple of years later by ourselves. There are hopeful signs that this can continue, as American libraries are more independent than their British counterparts (they can complain and lobby for extra funds for instance) and they also have a, gosh, lobbying group. Librarians there also appear to be more militant and vocal. We can hope that this will save them.

I’m loving the £5k prize – just for Gloucestershire libraries, sorry everyone else – for the library which best promotes reading. That’s got to be concentrating minds in that county, although the fact that Weakest Link judge Anne Robinson is judging entries may scare one or two off. Reader development was also exercising the minds of the Society of Chief Librarians, who have produced a useful report on what is currently happening (although there’s some fairly obvious problems with its evidence base and methodology – see if you can spot them – librarians just aren’t scientists and, to be fair, the research has been done on a shoestring) and have produced some recommendations. Sadly, none of them include in annual prize of £5k for each library service in the country but I want it to be known that if anyone does stump up that cash, I’m willing to be a judge. Gosh, what a great way to push motivation and share best practice.

Well, well, well, some good news. Liverpool, having had their funding cut reduced by central government, have overturned their £1.6m cut to libraries. That would have really hurt. In addition, we’re looking at new libraries (albeit co-locations) in Conwy, Leeds, Renfrewshire (£5m !) and West Lothian.

There’s continued hassle in Lancashire, with lots of problems transferring ownership to others, but that’s to be expected when you cut libraries like that. What’s not to be expected is claiming that no books will have been lost to the public in such a big cut, as a councillor did last week. That’s a ridiculous thing to say as anyone involved with closing libraries will tell you, and that’s not even taking into account a formal apology that, um, the same council had to make to Freckleton for losing all it’s special collection. Continuing the theme of councillors being economical with the truth, Bath have claimed the move of their central library to a location half the size further away from town had been agreed by the Libraries Task Force. I’ve checked with the Task Force and they confirm that’s simply not true and, indeed, they would not get involved in particular cases. Perhaps the councillor meant the DCMS library unit.

By the way, did you know that there’s a search box on the right hand side of the PLN webpage, about a screen down? Type the term you’re after into it and it’ll come up – type in one word (e.g. Bath) or, if you’re looking for two words, you can search for (for example) “local studies” by putting the quotation marks around them. This will bring up the posts with those words in – then search that post (CTRL and F works) for that term. That will bring up every use of that term or word on PLN.

Wow, what a lot of changes to library services today. The stand out to me is the combining of the Bournemouth and Poole library services, Such schemes have been slow to get off the ground, despite the needs of austerity, presumably due to local politicians not wanting to sign over services to others. Another two news items recount two separate community group run libraries that have been successful in gaining grants for refurbishments. Speaking of refurbishments, there’s a reassuring large amount of that going on as well. Finally, looks like GLL are in the running to run yet another library service – that of Bromley. Their expansion over the last few years is impressive and may make them the largest library operator in the country soon, depending on how you measure it.

– World Book Day. Some lovely pictures and news from around the country where libraries have been quite rightly promoting themselves to schools in connection with this day. My prize goes to Manchester, source of so much positive news recently, who provided thousands of free books to commuters. My thought for the future is that World Book Day is one which every library service should be involved – much like the Summer Reading Challenge – and it would be great to see a more national approach to this being taken rather than the atomised approaches I’m seeing from different library services.

– The mishandling of the change of location of Bath Central Library is truly the news story that keeps on giving. The council have quietly extended the “consultation” (although council workers are clear that the move, to a smaller and more remote site, is definitely going ahead – perhaps they did not get the memo?) and changed it, without telling anyone. The phrase “Having a bath” now means in my mind “hopeless library consultation”. Perhaps Warringhton Livewire have been advising them?

– The Taskforce have produced two very pro non-traditional income generation posts. One is very obvious but the one on Warwickshire starts out being on lessons learnt on their library redesigns but ends as an advertisement to use their framework for other library services for a fee [NB. my original version of this post suggested this was for consultancy, it was not – Ed.]. The taskforce have always been very much in favour of such things, and not simply as a way of mitigating the effects of budget cuts, with there being very little (or indeed no) noticeable pushback from anyone in senior library management about the problems this may have in conflicting with the public library ethos, or indeed in setting one library service in competition with another. I say this not as a dyed in the wool leftwinger – I’m not – but as someone who is aware when one side of the argument is not being given sufficient prominence (although to be fair the social media I see is very much in the opposite direction).

Please note that this website is produced entirely independently of any employer or other organisation. Any view expressed within are wholly mine.

Subscribe or Search

Join 1,566 other subscribers

Email Address

Contact

Please send any news, comment or thoughts to ianlibrarian@live.co.uk.

Find library changes and recent news near you

Numbers

From 1st January 2017, 100 libraries are under threat (5 in Bath, 17 in Bristol, 17 in Bury, 5 in Cheshire East, 3 in Cumbria, 7 in East Sussex, 4 in Liverpool, 7 in Midlothian, 21 in Northamptonshire, 10 in Plymouth, 4 in South Tyneside).

Since 1st April 2016 to end of March 2017. CIPFA reported 105 libraries closed, bringing the total to 3745 branches. 2015 to end of March 2016: CIPFA reported 121 libraries closed, bringing the total to 3850 libraries.
....
(April 1st 2015 to end of March 2016) 211 static and 39 mobile libraries (Aberdeen, Bracknell Forest, Bradford, Brighton & Hove, Cambridgeshire, Central Bedfordshire, Ceredigion, Croydon, Darlington, Dorset, Enfield, Falkirk, Fife, Greenwich, Herefordshire, Hertfordshire, Isle of Wight, Kirklees, Lambeth, Lancashire, Lewisham, Neath Port Talbot, Norfolk, Nottingham, Orkney, Oxfordshire, Pembrokeshire, Reading, Rhondda Cynon Taf, South Ayrshire, South Gloucestershire, South Lanarkshire, Staffordshire, Stockton, Swindon, Telford & Wrekin, Walsall, West Berkshire and Wiltshire) have been put under threat
....
In financial year 2014/15, there was a decline of 106 public libraries, (with 260 static libraries were put under threat of closure/passing to volunteers. 9 mobile libraries under threat in the same period). .

There are currently 3850 libraries in the UK (CIPFA figures for 2015/16). There were 4023 in 2013/14, 4482 in 2009/10 and 4622 in 2003/4.
....
The complete list is on "Tally by Local Authority" page as are other changes to budgets such as cuts to hours, bookfund and staffing. CIpfa have calculated that 121 service points lost in 2015/16, 106 service points were lost in 2014/15, 49 were lost in 2013/14, 74 were lost in 2012/13, 201 in 2011/12, 33 in 2010/11.
....
For a list of new and refurbished buildings see this page,

Cookies and Thank you

Please also note that this site uses cookies and use of the site presumes an inherent acceptance of this. Thank you.

I would also like to add at this point my thanks to Shirley Burnham for her frequent emails with relevant public libraries news which I then use as a a large part of the material for this site.

Warren O'Donoghue of Rabbitdigital Design has been wonderful in designing and creating this website, maintaining it and basically being there for the one hundred and one web problems that seem to surface all the time.